Correct, that is my opinion: that is the ethical decision I would make. :)

It is better to put a small number of people at minor risk in a game of anti-war political arm-twisting than it is to let a war that will put a lot more people at much greater risk be prolonged.

I think that you're deluded if you think that Wikileaks' actions will be of any benefit to the Afghanis. If the United States were to suddenly leave tomorrow, the region would not suddenly become peaceful. Possibly the contrary would happen.

Well obviously I am not deluded; you are putting words in my mouth. Read back and take note that I never said there would be any improvement for Afghanis. I said there would be less 'risk' because I am anti-war. The burden of proof is with you to show that a war creates less 'risk' if you want to take it.

> the region would not suddenly become peaceful.

You cannot prove this. Maybe it would. (Maybe a little.)